Obama demands/gets $20Billion + public apology from BP

[Scotty]

Obama received $77,051 in campaign contributions from BP.

 

[Zona]

BP did the right thing ponying up the $20B. The ONLY thing myself and others are saying is that Barry was in the wrong by demanding the $20B and threatening to kick someone's ass.

Don't even pretend like you wouldn't be saying the exact same thing if BOOSH had done something similar.

No. Unlike biased asshats such as yourself, reasonable people agree with the right thing to do regardless of who's doing it.

Why is the president wrong in demanding compensation for a company horribly damaging part of this country? Isn't that part of his JOB? What do you think ought to have happened in this situation?


BP agreed to pay SOMETHING. Not $20B. Do you really think they would have just ponied up that amount if no one demanded it of them? Hells no. Are you so naive as to believe they're doing it out of the kindness of their own heart? Out of a personal sense of moral responsibility or indebtedness? No. They said they would pay because that's what PR told them to say. They agreed to pay the amount demanded because THAT'S WHAT PR TOLD THEM TO DO. They're in the public spotlight for a major screwup. What else did you really think they'd do? They're not as dumb as you. They understand the principles of damage control.

Nope... what I know is that BP acted with negligence and they admit that...that's ALL I know. I don't know how much and I don't know who else was involved and I'd like to know all the facts...as would ANY judge...before making a decision of guilt and the penalty imposed.

You're saying it was settled out of court, but we're arguing that nothing has been settled yet, because the level of negligence has yet to be concluded.

Which means you don't know what "settling out of court" means. Nothing has to be established formally to settle a matter out of court. The only thing needed for that is that both parties agree to some terms, usually resulting in the plaintiff dropping the case upon the agreement being met. So when you say things like they need a judge to make a decision based on the extent of negligence, you are once again wrong because a judge is not needed to settle something out of court.

I mean, if you're not convinced that the number is good, examine the two possibilities: If it's too low, and BP should be paying more, the government will probably demand more later on, and there's no problem there. If it's too high, and BP should be paying less, they can reject the agreement and take the case to court, and there's STILL no problem.

So why are your panties still in a knot if the issue is being dealt with in a reasonable manner, and can continue to be dealt with reasonably even if the initial figure is off?

It's simple. Post me one other example where someone has basically agreed to a plea bargain with no set amount of damages AND still was facing a court case over the matter.

That's not the way it's done. When an agreement is made its for X amount of dollars and case closed. Not this government extortion of give us $20B now and maybe more later when we take you to court...........

The valdez went from 5 billion to 500 million because of Souter..Case closed my ass. Those people died waiting for the money. It took years!

Facts suck dont they! Perhaps the president LEARNED from that mess.

Still dont get it?

 

[Zona]

If the president went into a room, by himself, and came out a couple days later with the cure to cancer, you righty's would complain somehow. You are proving it with this 20 billion dollar life saver for those victims.

ConHog, you are a hack. Period.

 

[ConHog]

No. Unlike biased asshats such as yourself, reasonable people agree with the right thing to do regardless of who's doing it.

Why is the president wrong in demanding compensation for a company horribly damaging part of this country? Isn't that part of his JOB? What do you think ought to have happened in this situation?


BP agreed to pay SOMETHING. Not $20B. Do you really think they would have just ponied up that amount if no one demanded it of them? Hells no. Are you so naive as to believe they're doing it out of the kindness of their own heart? Out of a personal sense of moral responsibility or indebtedness? No. They said they would pay because that's what PR told them to say. They agreed to pay the amount demanded because THAT'S WHAT PR TOLD THEM TO DO. They're in the public spotlight for a major screwup. What else did you really think they'd do? They're not as dumb as you. They understand the principles of damage control.


Which means you don't know what "settling out of court" means. Nothing has to be established formally to settle a matter out of court. The only thing needed for that is that both parties agree to some terms, usually resulting in the plaintiff dropping the case upon the agreement being met. So when you say things like they need a judge to make a decision based on the extent of negligence, you are once again wrong because a judge is not needed to settle something out of court.

I mean, if you're not convinced that the number is good, examine the two possibilities: If it's too low, and BP should be paying more, the government will probably demand more later on, and there's no problem there. If it's too high, and BP should be paying less, they can reject the agreement and take the case to court, and there's STILL no problem.

So why are your panties still in a knot if the issue is being dealt with in a reasonable manner, and can continue to be dealt with reasonably even if the initial figure is off?

It's simple. Post me one other example where someone has basically agreed to a plea bargain with no set amount of damages AND still was facing a court case over the matter.

That's not the way it's done. When an agreement is made its for X amount of dollars and case closed. Not this government extortion of give us $20B now and maybe more later when we take you to court...........

The valdez went from 5 billion to 500 million because of Souter..Case closed my ass. Those people died waiting for the money. It took years!

Facts suck dont they! Perhaps the president LEARNED from that mess.

Still dont get it?

Was the OPA an active bill at the time of the Valdez? Apples and submarines comparing the two. However, I'm done with you here, I was under the mistaken impression that you were ready for an adult discussion, but alas you are not. Good evening.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

It's simple. Post me one other example where someone has basically agreed to a plea bargain with no set amount of damages AND still was facing a court case over the matter.

Your mistake is thinking there is only one thing in play here. There's not. There are a ton of issues, including but not limited to neglect, environmental damages, personal damages, people killed, etc. It is not uncommon for people to not contest an initial fine for a wrongful act and still get dragged into court for another act related to the same incident. O.J. Simpson was hit with a TON of cases at once. Do you really think he tried to contest the fines of the video-taped speeding police chase while trying to defend himself against manslaughter?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If the president went into a room, by himself, and came out a couple days later with the cure to cancer, you righty's would complain somehow. You are proving it with this 20 billion dollar life saver for those victims.

ConHog, you are a hack. Period.

No, but Obama is not their Messiah, nope, no, not at all, that's clear headed, objective thinking right there

 

[txlonghorn]

a couple things, Bush would have never, EVER asked an oil company to pay those victims...NEVER....

How you answer this proves everything..

You honestly think BP would have come up with 20 Billion dollars for the victims if it weren't for the president telling/asking them too?

Be honest now. Keep in mind, at first they were trying to get those people to sign 5k waivers...they lied about how much was spewing, they lied about being able to handle something like this, they had more violations than any other oil company that size etc etc..

First you all say he isnt being tough, now your saying he is being too tough. Typical.

you make some pretty big claims for someone else's actions Z. How can you back up that dumbass statement that Bush would NEVER ask an oil company to pay victims? I assume you are referring to those who lost their jobs...not their lives. And come to think of it, why the fuck would he have to? The normal way of doing it is to find the blame...measure it...determine the guilt....measure that...and then establish the financial restitution. That's how it should be done. He would have to "ASK" for anything. He could then say, "based on these findings, you're are hereby ordered to pay...."

Be honest here....isnt that what happened with the Valdez thing and how much money was paid in what time frame? (here is a hint, a lot , a lot...of them died before seeing penny one.) Perhaps the president didnt want that to happen again.

AGain, just say it, good job mr. president. Please dont say BP said they would pay...blah blah...they lied about EVERYTHING up to this point. Agree? If not, show me something they DIDNT lie about..

"After the 1994 court ruling requiring a settlement of $5 billion, Exxon launched a series of appeals. At a trial in 2006, the jury agreed to cut the settlement in half to $2.5 billion (CBC News - World - U.S. top court cuts Exxon Valdez oil spill damage award by 80%). In June 2008, Justice David Souter ruled that punitive damages cannot exceed the approximately $500 million Exxon has already paid to victims of the oil spill and their families. (CBC News - World - U.S. top court cuts Exxon Valdez oil spill damage award by 80%) "

Fucking Souter ....Souter made it so they only paid 500 million. It was supposed to be 5 billion.

This is exactly why Obama did what he did. Go Mr. President.

The only difference I see here is the two words.. "COURT RULING". Well...and that fact that the Valdeez was a vessel with limited capacity. It could have also been far more disastrous if it had been the same situation. Up this point, BP hasn't had the luxury of a court ruling. They did get to take a nice trip to the White House and drink coffee and eat donuts before the grilling began.

Yeah...BP knew they were screwed. And to be honest, the 20 billion might have been a pleasant surprise to them. They may have expected "Mr. President" to go for more. And in fact...he has. I'm still scratching my head over the expectation BO has that BP should pay the wages to workers who are out of work during the moratorium the HE himself decided to impose. I'll say one thing...he's got balls. He isn't afraid to tell you he expects you to bleed from EVERY orifice. I don't know how they will handle that part, but I kinda hope they tell him to kiss their ass and if he wants to avoid the job losses, then open the rigs back up. We're gonna suffer worse because of this moratorium. Gas prices are already starting back up. It's been nice the last few weeks. I bought gas for 2.35 two weeks ago. But then I noticed a station down the street that had 2.39 a gallon yesterday is back up to 2.46 today. Go figure. At that rate it will be back up around 2.80 or 2.90 in a couple of weeks. It's about to go nuts. Just watch.

 

[txlonghorn]

If the president went into a room, by himself, and came out a couple days later with the cure to cancer, you righty's would complain somehow. You are proving it with this 20 billion dollar life saver for those victims.

ConHog, you are a hack. Period.

Damn right!!! Two days??? Just to cure cancer? It took him TWO DAYS???

For those who can't detect sarcasm...that was.

 

[sangha]

NO ONE thinks that, we all KNOW he did the wrong thing, and you keep trying to spin it into saying we believe BP shouldn't be responsible for the cost of this spill, but in reality we are all saying that you don't have a law in place and just ignore that law because you feel that at some point in the future it will be shown that negligence on the part of BP caused this accident.

Let me ask you, what if an investigation determines that the real neglect was Transocean's? What then because the OPA clearly reads in that case that BP is not liable, will they get their $20B from the USG? Not bloody likely, and THAT is why you actually have an investigation before you determine someone is guilty of neglect.

Either you are a fucking idiot, or a troll. Either way, you suck as. Keep apologizing for us to bp.

Hey dumb ass, they volunteered the money after they were pushed by our preisdent. How can you possibly think this is a bad thing.

You are such a fucking hack, you would rather those people down there not get paid for years....(and eventually the fucking right wing supreme court members would make that money less than half some how.) Remember teh valdez ? Most of the victims died before even seeing penny one. You dumb fucking hack..

Yeah, b/c that is EXACTLY what I said, only the opposite.

BP did the right thing ponying up the $20B. The ONLY thing myself and others are saying is that Barry was in the wrong by demanding the $20B and threatening to kick someone's ass.

Don't even pretend like you wouldn't be saying the exact same thing if BOOSH had done something similar.

Zona, conjob is one of the haters who can't decide if Obama was a bully who forced BP to pony up 20B, or if Obama didn't force BP to do anything because BP was going to pay anyway.

IOW conjobs only objection is to what Obama said and not what he did.

In a related note, for all his bitching about Obama not reacting to the leak at first, when I asked him what Obama should have done, his only idea was that Obama should have flown to the Gulf for a photo op the day after the explosion.

He also thinks that BP shouldn't pay any claims until it fixes the leak and cleans up the oil.

He doesn't care about the people affected. All he cares about is BP and politics.

 

[sangha]

Yeah, b/c that is EXACTLY what I said, only the opposite.

BP did the right thing ponying up the $20B. The ONLY thing myself and others are saying is that Barry was in the wrong by demanding the $20B and threatening to kick someone's ass.
Don't even pretend like you wouldn't be saying the exact same thing if BOOSH had done something similar.

a couple things, Bush would have never, EVER asked an oil company to pay those victims...NEVER....But I will be honest with you, if he told a company that was fucking up my country to pay for it, hell yeah, I would have said, go get em. You see, that is where partisan bullshit goes out the window when they are screwing with our country...You dont get it....do you? Obviously not.

How you answer this proves everything..

You honestly think BP would have come up with 20 Billion dollars for the victims if it weren't for the president telling/asking them too?

Be honest now. Keep in mind, at first they were trying to get those people to sign 5k waivers...they lied about how much was spewing, they lied about being able to handle something like this, they had more violations than any other oil company that size etc etc..

First you all say he isnt being tough, now your saying he is being too tough. Typical.

By the way, Obama did "kick ass". Great going Sir.

What a reasonable response? Great, let's have it .

I disagree with you , Bush would have went after BP, maybe out of nothing more than political reality, but let's continue being honest and admit that ALL politicians including Obama and Bush act more out of politics than care for the people.

Secondly, yes BP did all the things you say, as would any company. That's business 101. Doesn't mean it's right, but that's the way the world works. if someone was stupid enough to just sign a waiver that's their problem. I'm not defending BP just pointing out that that is a reality.

Heck I'm not even saying Obama shouldn't have put the pressure on BP, I'm saying that he is demonizing them and trying to score political points by acting as if he swooped in and forced a company to do what was right when the fact is that is the first situation I can ever recall of hearing about where an entity was required to essentially admit guilt and pay a fine before any trial or anything. This despite the fact that sans proof of negligence the cap is supposed to be $75M.

And again, conjob argues that Obama forced BP to pay (ie an entity was required to essentially admit guilt and pay a fine before any trial or anything)

AND

arguing that Obama didn't do anything (ie acting as if he swooped in and forced a company to do what was right)

 

[sangha]

BP did the right thing ponying up the $20B. The ONLY thing myself and others are saying is that Barry was in the wrong by demanding the $20B and threatening to kick someone's ass.

Don't even pretend like you wouldn't be saying the exact same thing if BOOSH had done something similar.

No. Unlike biased asshats such as yourself, reasonable people agree with the right thing to do regardless of who's doing it.

Why is the president wrong in demanding compensation for a company horribly damaging part of this country? Isn't that part of his JOB? What do you think ought to have happened in this situation?


BP agreed to pay SOMETHING. Not $20B. Do you really think they would have just ponied up that amount if no one demanded it of them? Hells no. Are you so naive as to believe they're doing it out of the kindness of their own heart? Out of a personal sense of moral responsibility or indebtedness? No. They said they would pay because that's what PR told them to say. They agreed to pay the amount demanded because THAT'S WHAT PR TOLD THEM TO DO. They're in the public spotlight for a major screwup. What else did you really think they'd do? They're not as dumb as you. They understand the principles of damage control.

Nope... what I know is that BP acted with negligence and they admit that...that's ALL I know. I don't know how much and I don't know who else was involved and I'd like to know all the facts...as would ANY judge...before making a decision of guilt and the penalty imposed.

You're saying it was settled out of court, but we're arguing that nothing has been settled yet, because the level of negligence has yet to be concluded.

Which means you don't know what "settling out of court" means. Nothing has to be established formally to settle a matter out of court. The only thing needed for that is that both parties agree to some terms, usually resulting in the plaintiff dropping the case upon the agreement being met. So when you say things like they need a judge to make a decision based on the extent of negligence, you are once again wrong because a judge is not needed to settle something out of court.

I mean, if you're not convinced that the number is good, examine the two possibilities: If it's too low, and BP should be paying more, the government will probably demand more later on, and there's no problem there. If it's too high, and BP should be paying less, they can reject the agreement and take the case to court, and there's STILL no problem.

So why are your panties still in a knot if the issue is being dealt with in a reasonable manner, and can continue to be dealt with reasonably even if the initial figure is off?

It's simple. Post me one other example where someone has basically agreed to a plea bargain with no set amount of damages AND still was facing a court case over the matter.

That's not the way it's done. When an agreement is made its for X amount of dollars and case closed. Not this government extortion of give us $20B now and maybe more later when we take you to court...........

conjob proves his stupidity once again

Last night, I schooled him on the differences between civil cases and criminal cases, but he's too stupid to retain the info overnight

Civil cases dont have "plea bargains". They have "setllements"

And if you want an example of escrow being used before any costs have been assessed, it happens every time someone buys some real estate and puts money into escrow. IOW, it happens millions of times every year

but conjob will be too cowardly to respond to these facts

And note that he is still accusing Obama of forcing BP to pay (note his use of the word "extort") while also arguing that Obama didn't force BP to do anything

conjob will lie about anything and everything

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No. Unlike biased asshats such as yourself, reasonable people agree with the right thing to do regardless of who's doing it.

Why is the president wrong in demanding compensation for a company horribly damaging part of this country? Isn't that part of his JOB? What do you think ought to have happened in this situation?


BP agreed to pay SOMETHING. Not $20B. Do you really think they would have just ponied up that amount if no one demanded it of them? Hells no. Are you so naive as to believe they're doing it out of the kindness of their own heart? Out of a personal sense of moral responsibility or indebtedness? No. They said they would pay because that's what PR told them to say. They agreed to pay the amount demanded because THAT'S WHAT PR TOLD THEM TO DO. They're in the public spotlight for a major screwup. What else did you really think they'd do? They're not as dumb as you. They understand the principles of damage control.


Which means you don't know what "settling out of court" means. Nothing has to be established formally to settle a matter out of court. The only thing needed for that is that both parties agree to some terms, usually resulting in the plaintiff dropping the case upon the agreement being met. So when you say things like they need a judge to make a decision based on the extent of negligence, you are once again wrong because a judge is not needed to settle something out of court.

I mean, if you're not convinced that the number is good, examine the two possibilities: If it's too low, and BP should be paying more, the government will probably demand more later on, and there's no problem there. If it's too high, and BP should be paying less, they can reject the agreement and take the case to court, and there's STILL no problem.

So why are your panties still in a knot if the issue is being dealt with in a reasonable manner, and can continue to be dealt with reasonably even if the initial figure is off?

It's simple. Post me one other example where someone has basically agreed to a plea bargain with no set amount of damages AND still was facing a court case over the matter.

That's not the way it's done. When an agreement is made its for X amount of dollars and case closed. Not this government extortion of give us $20B now and maybe more later when we take you to court...........

conjob proves his stupidity once again

Last night, I schooled him on the differences between civil cases and criminal cases, but he's too stupid to retain the info overnight

Civil cases dont have "plea bargains". They have "setllements"

And if you want an example of escrow being used before any costs have been assessed, it happens every time someone buys some real estate and puts money into escrow. IOW, it happens millions of times every year

but conjob will be too cowardly to respond to these facts

And note that he is still accusing Obama of forcing BP to pay (note his use of the word "extort") while also arguing that Obama didn't force BP to do anything

conjob will lie about anything and everything

BP bought real estate? That's your new line of reasoning?

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Morons on this board have a difficult time with the concept of examples. I keep finding they assume any comparison, even between parts of the whole, is interpreted as meaning the entirety of both things are completely equal.

 

[sangha]

It's simple. Post me one other example where someone has basically agreed to a plea bargain with no set amount of damages AND still was facing a court case over the matter.

That's not the way it's done. When an agreement is made its for X amount of dollars and case closed. Not this government extortion of give us $20B now and maybe more later when we take you to court...........

conjob proves his stupidity once again

Last night, I schooled him on the differences between civil cases and criminal cases, but he's too stupid to retain the info overnight

Civil cases dont have "plea bargains". They have "setllements"

And if you want an example of escrow being used before any costs have been assessed, it happens every time someone buys some real estate and puts money into escrow. IOW, it happens millions of times every year

but conjob will be too cowardly to respond to these facts

And note that he is still accusing Obama of forcing BP to pay (note his use of the word "extort") while also arguing that Obama didn't force BP to do anything

conjob will lie about anything and everything

BP bought real estate? That's your new line of reasoning?

Escrow accounts are used in real estate transactions

We'll add that to the long list of Things Crusader Frank Does Not Know

 

[sangha]

Morons on this board have a difficult time with the concept of examples. I keep finding they assume any comparison, even between parts of the whole, is interpreted as meaning the entirety of both things are completely equal.

They also like "argumentum ab absurdum". If you say one aspect of a case is settled, they think that means every aspect of every case has been settled.

If you think BP should pay for damages, it means you want to bankrupt BP

It's because they have no argument. If they told the truth, they'd have nothing to say

 

[CrusaderFrank]

conjob proves his stupidity once again

Last night, I schooled him on the differences between civil cases and criminal cases, but he's too stupid to retain the info overnight

Civil cases dont have "plea bargains". They have "setllements"

And if you want an example of escrow being used before any costs have been assessed, it happens every time someone buys some real estate and puts money into escrow. IOW, it happens millions of times every year

but conjob will be too cowardly to respond to these facts

And note that he is still accusing Obama of forcing BP to pay (note his use of the word "extort") while also arguing that Obama didn't force BP to do anything

conjob will lie about anything and everything

BP bought real estate? That's your new line of reasoning?

Escrow accounts are used in real estate transactions

We'll add that to the long list of Things Crusader Frank Does Not Know

So, extorting $20B under threat of criminal prosecution is like buying a summer house?

 

[sangha]

BP bought real estate? That's your new line of reasoning?

Escrow accounts are used in real estate transactions

We'll add that to the long list of Things Crusader Frank Does Not Know

So, extorting $20B under threat of criminal prosecution is like buying a summer house?

If you think it was extortion, then sue the govt (if you've got the guts (which you don't)) instead of whinging on the internet like a little baby

 

[SmarterThanHick]

So, extorting $20B under threat of criminal prosecution is like buying a summer house?

Once again you fail to demonstrate any degree of knowledge of what settling out of court actually means. Extortion is illegal. BP can sue the government if they thought it was extortion. The fact that they are admitting their negligence and agreeing to pay the amount specified without further complaint should key you in on the fact that it's not extortion.

"Criminal prosecution" is not a threat. It's the justice system. If someone is innocent, there is nothing to fear with criminal prosecution.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Escrow accounts are used in real estate transactions

We'll add that to the long list of Things Crusader Frank Does Not Know

So, extorting $20B under threat of criminal prosecution is like buying a summer house?

If you think it was extortion, then sue the govt (if you've got the guts (which you don't)) instead of whinging on the internet like a little baby

You're not an attorney are you?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So, extorting $20B under threat of criminal prosecution is like buying a summer house?

Once again you fail to demonstrate any degree of knowledge of what settling out of court actually means. Extortion is illegal. BP can sue the government if they thought it was extortion. The fact that they are admitting their negligence and agreeing to pay the amount specified without further complaint should key you in on the fact that it's not extortion.

"Criminal prosecution" is not a threat. It's the justice system. If someone is innocent, there is nothing to fear with criminal prosecution.

Settling out of court? Are you really that fucking retarded? We don't even know the extend of the ongoing damage!

The only thing "Settled" is that Obama is a fucking Fascist